However, whether you are guilty of an offence won't be narrowly defined like that, it will be more of a case of whether your behaviour causes offence, distress, harm, harassment, hate or is unwanted by the victim on the basis that they are a woman.
These are all valid concerns. Obviously, the law should be objective. And I'm not saying that this law is good or whatever (though I obviously do support bans on revenge porn).
That goes way beyond the few behaviours mentioned, the concept of misogyny is vaguely defined (purposely)
Not having read the law, but having read this article, it is my understanding that this law does not talk about 'misogyny' - and that this is how the media is framing it.
This proposal is supposed to keep women "safe", not just from revenge porn and cyber-stalking, but from all unwanted and harmful (even if legal) behaviour and communication.
That is certainly what the Tory tards who want to amend it want.
These are all valid concerns. Obviously, the law should be objective. And I'm not saying that this law is good or whatever (though I obviously do support bans on revenge porn).
Not having read the law, but having read this article, it is my understanding that this law does not talk about 'misogyny' - and that this is how the media is framing it.
That is certainly what the Tory tards who want to amend it want.